This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
The noun shituf is a term for a partnership meal.
Lisa, This (both the deletion of WP:RS sourced content [above], and the edit summary) was uncalled for:
Firstly edit summaries aren't the correct place to make this sort of comment. Secondly WP:AGF, WP:NPA. Thirdly, whatever your personal understanding of the Hebrew term shituf may be, checking Google Books and Google Scholar shows that around half of references in in English WP:RS, which you've deleted from article, are to the shituf meal. At the very least some kind of disambiguation hat note is needed to the other usage. If you know where in Wikipedia that is discussed. It would really help if you contribute on Talk pages and provide WP:RS for your edits and deletions. In ictu oculi ( talk) 04:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Dear Lisa Please, everyone should WP:AGF. I'm not doing anything evil or morally wrong to add a source in an article to other uses of a term that has several uses. But rest assured if you don't want any other use of shituf mentioned or linked in the article, then I won't be the one to go against you. Happy? However, here on Talk, you should be aware that Google Scholar shows not just one meaning, but a broader range of uses as well, e.g. J. Perlmann Dissent and Discipline in Ben Gurion's Labor Party: 1930–32 Economics Working Paper Archive, 2006 "There is no common ground (shituf) between these members and the party, and the appearance of pamphlets like these cannot ..." - whether this is handled by a hatnote, an etymology paragraph, or whatever, it's evident that there are other WP:RS on shituf out there that fall outside the information in the article. I note it for other users here in case anyone comes to the article later. Best wishes. In ictu oculi ( talk) 12:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Based on In Ictu's poor presentation (cherry picking?) of sources supporting his attempted move of Talk:B'rov am hadrat melech (see the move request on the discussion page), I recommend that his presentation of sources here be taken with a grain of salt until someone else has had the time to check the sources independently with Google Book Search. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 17:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
The noun shituf is a term for a partnership meal.
Lisa, This (both the deletion of WP:RS sourced content [above], and the edit summary) was uncalled for:
Firstly edit summaries aren't the correct place to make this sort of comment. Secondly WP:AGF, WP:NPA. Thirdly, whatever your personal understanding of the Hebrew term shituf may be, checking Google Books and Google Scholar shows that around half of references in in English WP:RS, which you've deleted from article, are to the shituf meal. At the very least some kind of disambiguation hat note is needed to the other usage. If you know where in Wikipedia that is discussed. It would really help if you contribute on Talk pages and provide WP:RS for your edits and deletions. In ictu oculi ( talk) 04:25, 27 November 2011 (UTC)
Dear Lisa Please, everyone should WP:AGF. I'm not doing anything evil or morally wrong to add a source in an article to other uses of a term that has several uses. But rest assured if you don't want any other use of shituf mentioned or linked in the article, then I won't be the one to go against you. Happy? However, here on Talk, you should be aware that Google Scholar shows not just one meaning, but a broader range of uses as well, e.g. J. Perlmann Dissent and Discipline in Ben Gurion's Labor Party: 1930–32 Economics Working Paper Archive, 2006 "There is no common ground (shituf) between these members and the party, and the appearance of pamphlets like these cannot ..." - whether this is handled by a hatnote, an etymology paragraph, or whatever, it's evident that there are other WP:RS on shituf out there that fall outside the information in the article. I note it for other users here in case anyone comes to the article later. Best wishes. In ictu oculi ( talk) 12:46, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Based on In Ictu's poor presentation (cherry picking?) of sources supporting his attempted move of Talk:B'rov am hadrat melech (see the move request on the discussion page), I recommend that his presentation of sources here be taken with a grain of salt until someone else has had the time to check the sources independently with Google Book Search. - Lisa ( talk - contribs) 17:01, 2 December 2011 (UTC)